AI Rate Professor

Graphic Communication

Zachariah Ruvalcaba

GCMW202 · GCMW102 · COMM641 · GC208 · 7 lifetime ratings

AI rating
34/100
RMP rating
2.7/5
Take again
—
Difficulty
3.6

The decision

Prefer his online video-based courses if available; and .

Best fit · Self Taught ProSelf-Promotes MaterialsDisorganized SyllabusBook-Lecture MismatchOnline Video StrengthNot Hands-On
  • In-person students often report forced purchase of his books that do not match lectures.
  • Online GCMW202 praise free video training and solid web-tech knowledge.
  • Organization, syllabus dates, and catalog course content are frequent complaints.

Key questions

Four answers before you build your schedule.

Is this an easy A?

FairEffort

52/100

The online section reported an A from following videos, but and stress tough prep needs.

Online evidence suggests an easier A path; .

Is the course easy?

Standard

42/100

Content can be manageable with videos online, but in person students say you need prior PHP/MySQL and .

Online reviews describe easier guided videos; .

Is attendance flexible?

Mandatory

35/100

At ; most others do not detail policy.

Mandatory note comes from an in-person review; .

Is this professor recommended?

Avoid

35/100

and self-promotion, with only isolated strong praise.

Online review is strongly positive; .

Course guide

See how this professor fits your week.

Grading

Fair

50/100

Little explicit grading critique; one A reported online, with .

Format shift

Sparse grade detail; online student earned an A.

Workload

Moderate

45/100

Heavy book reading and assignments are common; online path is more watch-and-apply.

Format shift

Online workload feels lighter via videos; in person feels heavier and book-driven.

Teaching experience

Poor

38/100

Knows web tech and can make good videos, but live and not hands-on.

Format shift

Online teaching praised; in-person teaching largely criticized.

Assessment method

FocusOnAssignments

30/100

, and book exercises rather than formal exams.

Format shift

Both formats emphasize assignments and projects.

Luni fit check

Weigh these signals against your actual schedule.

Get help balancing workload, grading, and timing when no option is an obvious fit.

Course format

Compare the in-person and online experience.

Classroom format

In person

6 reviews

Medium confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

In-person reviews emphasize book sales, lecture-book mismatch, disorganization, and courses that do not match the catalog description.

Main concern

, and weak hands-on teaching.

What students said

“Requires purchase of his DWCS4 book, it focuses on store and asp yet his lectures teach CS5”
GCMW202
“professor dissappared and stopped posting lectures leaving students to work out of book only”
GCMW102
“Very disappointed, class was not as it was cataloged”
GCMW202

Remote format

Online

1 reviews

Low confidence · Best fit for Self Taught Pro

One online student loved free Dreamweaver video training and .

Main concern

Only one online review, so results may not generalize.

What students said

“He provided his own video training series for Dreamweaver CS6 that he made which I thought was great and did not cost me anything”
GCMW202

Exam style

Know what to expect from exams and major assignments.

Reviews barely describe formal exams and focus on assignments and project work instead.

Assignment-HeavyVideo-Guided ProjectsLimited Exam Detail

Assessment risk

Varies

55/100

Low score means less forgiving assessment conditions.

In person

and focus on homework, books, and projects.

Book-Based AssignmentsProject Focus
“Lesson Plan dates conflicts with dates on Syllabus as well as assignments.”
GCMW102

Online

Online work centered on watching his videos and creating assignments; .

Video TrainingAssignment-Based
“Just watch the videos and use what he has .”
GCMW202

Student evidence

See what students actually said.

Top student voice

“Very disappointed, class was not as it was cataloged”

Voice snapshots generated from 7 reviews (1 online, 6 in person), highlighting format contrast and organization themes. Credibility rating: Medium.

📚 Self-Promotion Issues

30/100

“he required purchase of and promoted his own dw cs4 book which was irrelevant to course”

💻 Online Strength

85/100

“He provided his own video training series for Dreamweaver CS6 that he made which I thought was great”

🗂️ Organization Gaps

28/100

“Syllabus doesn't match up to dates due.”

Theme 1

👨‍🏫 About Teaching Style

  • Not at all hands on instructor
  • lectures are long and for examples
  • He really knows web technology

Theme 2

📖 About Materials

  • book rarely follows what is being lectured on
  • promoted his own dw cs4 book which was irrelevant
  • video training series ... did not cost me anything

Theme 3

⚠️ About Course Fit

  • class was not as it was cataloged
  • and mysql before attempting this class
  • Students confused because Professor unorganized

Data context

See exactly what the AI read.

Analysis sample

7

Recent reviews read by the AI

7

Lifetime ratings

48/100

Evidence confidence

Seven reviews span 2007-2016 with useful format contrast, but several are old, vague, or repetitive and grade data is thin.

Inside 7 stored ratings

Quality ratings

5 out of 52
4 out of 50
3 out of 51
2 out of 53
1 out of 51

Course coverage

GCMW2024 reviews
COMM6411 review
GC2081 review
GCMW1021 review

Reported outcomes

A range results lead the reported letter grades.

1 reported outcomes

A range

1

A 1

B range

0

No reported values

C range

0

No reported values

D range

0

No reported values

F

0

No reported values

No letter grade reported

0

No reported values